Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 14th Feb 2006 22:25 UTC
PC-BSD "After using PC-BSD several days, I was impressed with how easy it is to use. It's a good desktop OS, and a great way to introduce BSD to new users. The 1.0 release has a few rough edges, but nothing that should scare off prospective users. For the future, I'd like to see something like Synaptic to manage PBI packages and allow users to browse for software without having to visit the PC-BSD Web site, and it would be nice if the site had a little more documentation, but I expect such things will come along in due time as the project matures."
Thread beginning with comment 95822
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
A few details...
by Charles A Landemaine on Wed 15th Feb 2006 11:51 UTC
Charles A Landemaine
Member since:

You can have the same desktop with FreeBSD+KDE

Not exactly. PC-BSD is full of enhancements, utilities, custom configurations, etc... On FreeBSD you may need a few days to customize it to your liking, and still it won't have all the PC-BSD ease-of-use. FreeBSD is very rough around the hedges. PC-BSD is still, but a lot less ;)

I don't understand why it takes so many months to finish 1.0, considering it's based on a current release of FreeBSD.

It's taking time because we're improving many features, and we're adding a lot of additional configurations, for instance, now fonts look just like on Windows with custom rules in fontconfig. Also we should have more than 50 different languages available for 1.0 release, we are fixing many minor annoyances, bugs, we're testing, etc... It takes a lot of time...

PC-BSD is based on FreeBSD but there is still a big difference between both of them. Making a server OS an easy-to-use desktop OS takes hell of a time.

Also, we're a very small team of devs ATM.

If you want to join us and help out, you're mostly welcome ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE: A few details...
by OSGuy on Wed 15th Feb 2006 12:07 in reply to "A few details..."
OSGuy Member since:

Charles, Please try to find a way to turn of the anti-aliasing in FF and TB so when we make the fonts look like Windows they also work on FF. I don't know why it doesn't work anymore but I have done it before on a Linux ditsro. The only differnce was, I had to turn the byte-interpreter off manually and re-compile FreeType. In BSD it's already off as you mentioned once. I had fonts in FF look same as in Windows along with KDE and GNOME. I am not sure why it didn't work in BSD.

Edited 2006-02-15 12:12

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: A few details...
by Charles A Landemaine on Wed 15th Feb 2006 12:10 in reply to "RE: A few details..."
Charles A Landemaine Member since:

Yes, we're working on it:
If you ever find a solution, please tell us... This has been a real challenge lately... But early or late we'll find a solution! ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: A few details...
by Charles A Landemaine on Wed 15th Feb 2006 12:32 in reply to "RE: A few details..."
Charles A Landemaine Member since:

Actually, the Bytecode Interpreter is off in the former linux_base-7 that we used. Now we use linux_base-rh9 and it is enabled, but the problem is that all fonts are antialiased now. The bytecode interpreter needs to be turned on so that the antialiasing rules of fontconfig work properly though. This is the way it works on FreeBSD at least.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: A few details...
by molnarcs on Thu 16th Feb 2006 00:55 in reply to "A few details..."
molnarcs Member since:

I just wanted to add: take you time, there is really no point in rushing this. PC-BSD 1.0-Final, when released, should hit with a BANG, so in my opinion, it is better to try to work out even minor issues than releasing something that is rough around the edges. We have plenty of that kind of releases in linux-land, especially among desktop oriented distributions (Mandrake/driva, Kubuntu Breezy - the last one I tried - PC-BSD is already as good as these, but that is not good enough imho... we should do better ;) )

Reply Parent Score: 1